Newbie--help me with my indoor grow setup please!

[TinyArt]

These folks certainly look well-established & active -- in case a plant swap might be the easiest solution for you and the newts. I'll be glad to see you succeed, no matter what, but I'm hoping there's a way to roll your original investment over into peaceful enjoyment, without a lot of fuss or expense.

Pittsburgh Bonsai Society - years and still growing…

www.pittsburghbonsai.org

 

[Aquaticjade]

Plant lights can be much cheaper than that.... I end up paying in between 40-120 for a new lanp. (Many factors depending” For 250.. you could get several lights.

I'm not opposed to getting an extra plant light. My issue is the paludarium can't have any lights that omit heat. I feel like I would be knocking my chances with the elms surviving a peg by adding a light until November but then having to take it away once the paludarium is set up. Not sure if you read into the thread too deeply as the comment section is getting quite long.....I intended to put these trees in a newt paludarium. The newts were 4 times as expensive/rare/precious than the trees so their needs are top priority over flora. They need cooler water, so if there's a suggestion for a low heat light I'd be down.

 

[Aquaticjade]

I don't know why this blew up so much.

Plants need certain growing conditions. Whether these conditions are outside or inside does not really matter. It can just be really hard to get some of these conditions to be present inside.
If a plant requires seasonality, then for indoors that is extremely hard. You cannot really cool a room down to simulate winter.

First point would be to pick a (sub)tropical species that does not care about eternal summer.
Second issue is light. The indoor light intensity we as humans prefer when it is dark is really a fraction of the brightness of outdoor light. Having a room with outdoor brightness (or clear summer day PPFD) is going to be extremely bright. But this could be done. And you can also compensate in some cases with less bright but longer days. Unless the plants are shade loving plants, you need lights about as bright as required by a coral reef tank.
Third is humidity. Indoor humidity is lower than outdoors. But if you set up an aquarium or maybe a paludarium, then I guess that would increase humidity. You can always make an enclosure or tent or covered glass bowl/tank/cuboid.
Fourth would probably be ventilation. Indoor air is stale, and for some plant species this causes problems. This is true for many of our outdoor bonsai subjects. But many house plants and plants ideal for a paludarium wouldn't care about this at all. And if needed, ventilation might be added.

So the question is then if these Ulmus × hollandica 'Jacqueline Hillier' are the ideal plants for your paludarium. So far, it doesn't sound like they are the perfect candidate. Might they thrive for at least a while? Maybe. But it seems that no one here knows how to achieve this indoors.


I think it would make much more sense to set up the paladarium, get some bright full spectrum lights for those, and then put whatever species you want to grow in your paludarium inside the paludarium itself right away. I didn't read the entire thread, but I am a bit confused as to why you are growing these elms in pots indoors rather than inside the paludarium.

I dont have the paludarium set up yet. It's a DIY project that will take me roughly a month to build. Not counting the wait time for me to actually get the glass tank for the paludarium. Glass shortages are hitting the herp and aquarium trade pretty hard right now. I won't have the tank until end of October, palu build won't be ready for planting until the end of November. I bought the trees now assuming the farms were growing them outside. If I waited until November the trees most likely would have already dropped leaves and gone dormant which would pose an issue trying to plant them in a lighted setup indoors. Going back to the original discussion in the thread, I'm a beginner that was mislead by the indirect wording that Eastern leaf used to describe whether these were indoor capable trees.

 

[Aquaticjade]

These folks certainly look well-established & active -- in case a plant swap might be the easiest solution for you and the newts. I'll be glad to see you succeed, no matter what, but I'm hoping there's a way to roll your original investment over into peaceful enjoyment, without a lot of fuss or expense.

Pittsburgh Bonsai Society - years and still growing…

www.pittsburghbonsai.org

Perhaps I will try and message them. I wouldn't mind trading these for ficus if I was able to. Seems ficus should have been what I bought from the get go, I was drawn in by the leaves on these elms and again the language eastern leaf used to describe the capability of these to grow indoors was very vague. These are definitely very pretty trees, I'd hate to kill them and also waste my money.

 

[Paradox]

I'm not opposed to getting an extra plant light. My issue is the paludarium can't have any lights that omit heat. I feel like I would be knocking my chances with the elms surviving a peg by adding a light until November but then having to take it away once the paludarium is set up. Not sure if you read into the thread too deeply as the comment section is getting quite long.....I intended to put these trees in a newt paludarium. The newts were 4 times as expensive/rare/precious than the trees so their needs are top priority over flora. They need cooler water, so if there's a suggestion for a low heat light I'd be down.

Your only option for low temperature is LED lights

 

[ShadyStump]

I don't know why this blew up so much.

Plants need certain growing conditions. Whether these conditions are outside or inside does not really matter. It can just be really hard to get some of these conditions to be present inside.
If a plant requires seasonality, then for indoors that is extremely hard. You cannot really cool a room down to simulate winter.

First point would be to pick a (sub)tropical species that does not care about eternal summer.
Second issue is light. The indoor light intensity we as humans prefer when it is dark is really a fraction of the brightness of outdoor light. Having a room with outdoor brightness (or clear summer day PPFD) is going to be extremely bright. But this could be done. And you can also compensate in some cases with less bright but longer days. Unless the plants are shade loving plants, you need lights about as bright as required by a coral reef tank.
Third is humidity. Indoor humidity is lower than outdoors. But if you set up an aquarium or maybe a paludarium, then I guess that would increase humidity. You can always make an enclosure or tent or covered glass bowl/tank/cuboid.
Fourth would probably be ventilation. Indoor air is stale, and for some plant species this causes problems. This is true for many of our outdoor bonsai subjects. But many house plants and plants ideal for a paludarium wouldn't care about this at all. And if needed, ventilation might be added.

So the question is then if these Ulmus × hollandica 'Jacqueline Hillier' are the ideal plants for your paludarium. So far, it doesn't sound like they are the perfect candidate. Might they thrive for at least a while? Maybe. But it seems that no one here knows how to achieve this indoors.


I think it would make much more sense to set up the paladarium, get some bright full spectrum lights for those, and then put whatever species you want to grow in your paludarium inside the paludarium itself right away. I didn't read the entire thread, but I am a bit confused as to why you are growing these elms in pots indoors rather than inside the paludarium.

The paludarium is essentially under construction. The trees will be out of the pots and permanently planted, if I recall correctly, around November. She has a decent light, we're just uncertain it will be enough for this application. The paludarium will occupied by some rare newt species from the mountains of northern Iran.

The elms were a noob choice that, it turns out, are not so ideal for their intended use, but we're trying to help her find a way to make it all not a waste of time and money. There's also the learning curve we're all interested in. If we can come up with a successful means of caring for these elms indoors for some time, there are great implications for bonsai as well as OP's usage.
Necessity is the mother of invention, and we intend to create impressive things. The nature of their impressiveness is yet to be determined.

 

[HorseloverFat]

The paludarium is essentially under construction. The trees will be out of the pots and permanently planted, if I recall correctly, around November. She has a decent light, we're just uncertain it will be enough for this application. The paludarium will occupied by some rare newt species from the mountains of northern Iran.

The elms were a noob choice that, it turns out, are not so ideal for their intended use, but we're trying to help her find a way to make it all not a waste of time and money. There's also the learning curve we're all interested in. If we can come up with a successful means of caring for these elms indoors for some time, there are great implications for bonsai as well as OP's usage.
Necessity is the mother of invention, and we intend to create impressive things. The nature of their impressiveness is yet to be determined.

Fantastic summary, Shady.

I also wasn’t “read up”

 

[ShadyStump]

Your only option for low temperature is LED lights

I'm not opposed to getting an extra plant light. My issue is the paludarium can't have any lights that omit heat. I feel like I would be knocking my chances with the elms surviving a peg by adding a light until November but then having to take it away once the paludarium is set up. Not sure if you read into the thread too deeply as the comment section is getting quite long.....I intended to put these trees in a newt paludarium. The newts were 4 times as expensive/rare/precious than the trees so their needs are top priority over flora. They need cooler water, so if there's a suggestion for a low heat light I'd be down.

LEDs that are both bright and cool running are fairly easy to get. I have one on my desk right now that screws into a standard light socket, puts out very bright white light, and can be grasped in the hand quite comfortably after running for hours. Home Depot, about $25, included special features that I'll likely never use, but it fit in my desk lamp and was bright enough for the job. My ficus has been loving it, and that light is about all it ever gets.
This one, actually.

Feit Electric 17-Watt E26 A21 Selectable Spectrum for Seeding Growing Blooming Indoor Greenhouse Plant Grow LED Light Bulb (1-Pack) A21/ADJ/GRW/LED/HDRP - The Home Depot

Fill your space with bright light by choosing this affordably priced Feit Electric Equivalent LED Plant Grow Light Bulb.

www.homedepot.com

That was the one I was confident in that they had on the local shelf. You could probably do cheaper on Amazon or the like, and get something more suited to the use. You could just hit the local thrift store for some light fixtures you think could work, and then only buy the bulbs. Fit them in with the light you already have, and place your trees strategically.

 

[_#1_]

LEDs that are both bright and cool running are fairly easy to get. I have one on my desk right now that screws into a standard light socket, puts out very bright white light, and can be grasped in the hand quite comfortably after running for hours. Home Depot, about $25, included special features that I'll likely never use, but it fit in my desk lamp and was bright enough for the job. My ficus has been loving it, and that light is about all it ever gets.
This one, actually.

Feit Electric 17-Watt E26 A21 Selectable Spectrum for Seeding Growing Blooming Indoor Greenhouse Plant Grow LED Light Bulb (1-Pack) A21/ADJ/GRW/LED/HDRP - The Home Depot

Fill your space with bright light by choosing this affordably priced Feit Electric Equivalent LED Plant Grow Light Bulb.

www.homedepot.com

That was the one I was confident in that they had on the local shelf. You could probably do cheaper on Amazon or the like, and get something more suited to the use. You could just hit the local thrift store for some light fixtures you think could work, and then only buy the bulbs. Fit them in with the light you already have, and place your trees strategically.

Dude, you're recommending lightbulb well underpowered man. For comparison sake vegetative growing for uhhh 'tomato" indoors is at least 250 PAR. Getting them to flower needs at least 500 PAR. Your light bulb is 20 PAR lol.

That would be a total waste of $20+

I did a little unscientific experiment last winter where I did not give my ficus and newly acquired miracle berry bush any supplemental light. I had a 4X4' T5 HO light. It grew the same as the year before when it had the light for about 12hr/day.
The miracle berry bush grew well too without supplemental light. They were placed in front of large south facing window.

You're talking about a ficus that may not even need the cheap light. The subject here is elm.

 

[ShadyStump]

Dude, you're recommending lightbulb well underpowered man. For comparison sake vegetative growing for uhhh 'tomato" indoors is at least 250 PAR. Getting them to flower needs at least 500 PAR. Your light bulb is 20 PAR lol.

That would be a total waste of $20+

I did a little unscientific experiment last winter where I did not give my ficus and newly acquired miracle berry bush any supplemental light. I had a 4X4' T5 HO light. It grew the same as the year before when it had the light for about 12hr/day.
The miracle berry bush grew well too without supplemental light. They were placed in front of large south facing window.

You're talking about a ficus that may not even need the cheap light. The subject here is elm.

Said before, I'm no expert on lights. The one I got is on a setting that's rated at almost 29 PAR, it's a hell of allot brighter than the ones we used on our tomato and pepper starts in the window over winter, running 15 hours a day, and my ficus is nowhere near any other substantial light source.
No trying to make a direct comparison, much less recommendation. Just saying it's not hard to find a solid lighting set up that should do.



Actually I've wondered if the right foliar spray might help. Something that would supplement the nutrients produced by photosynthesis.
Probably no such thing, but it seems like someone out there is working on this.
I have been drinking tonight.

 

[Paradox]

Said before, I'm no expert on lights. The one I got is on a setting that's rated at almost 29 PAR, it's a hell of allot brighter than the ones we used on our tomato and pepper starts in the window over winter, running 15 hours a day, and my ficus is nowhere near any other substantial light source.
No trying to make a direct comparison, much less recommendation. Just saying it's not hard to find a solid lighting set up that should do.



Actually I've wondered if the right foliar spray might help. Something that would supplement the nutrients produced by photosynthesis.
Probably no such thing, but it seems like someone out there is working on this.
I have been drinking tonight.

Fertilizer is not a replacement for photosynthesis. You can't feed your way past low light conditions

 

[Glaucus]

Plants get their energy/calories through photosynthesis. But they get nutrients/minerals through the roots. It is actually the opposite of replacing. The more light a plant gets, the more need for nutrients. The less light, the less need for nutrients.

Also, you cannot really judge the amount of photosynthetic photons provided by judging brightness with our eyes.

You can estimate the PAR provided by a light by using the wattage expended, estimating the efficiency based on the design, and adjusting how many photons are photosynthetically available by putting in the colour temperature. But the best way of course is to measure using a quantum light sensor. Apogee makes these, which is a spinoff company of one of the famous scientists involved in experiments on the relationship between light intensity and quality, and plant grow rate.

There are a lot of grow lights out there. It is hard to buy a light that is way underpowered to what you need, or way overpowered to what you need.

 

[HorseloverFat]

There are a lot of grow lights out there. It is hard to buy a light that is way underpowered to what you need, or way overpowered to what you need.

Yes!

 

[ShadyStump]

Plants get their energy/calories through photosynthesis. But they get nutrients/minerals through the roots. It is actually the opposite of replacing. The more light a plant gets, the more need for nutrients. The less light, the less need for nutrients.

Also, you cannot really judge the amount of photosynthetic photons provided by judging brightness with our eyes.

You can estimate the PAR provided by a light by using the wattage expended, estimating the efficiency based on the design, and adjusting how many photons are photosynthetically available by putting in the colour temperature. But the best way of course is to measure using a quantum light sensor. Apogee makes these, which is a spinoff company of one of the famous scientists involved in experiments on the relationship between light intensity and quality, and plant grow rate.

There are a lot of grow lights out there. It is hard to buy a light that is way underpowered to what you need, or way overpowered to what you need.

My comment last night was mostly speculative. It seems reasonable that there may be a way discovered one day to chemically force the production of said calories, but we're likely a generation away from anything that could be effective in this situation.

On another related note, PAR is not exactly the thing to consider, but light penetration, and spectra intensity and width. Also, distance makes difference. A PAR 28 measurement at 6 inches is probably going to give you better results than a PAR 100 at 1 inch purely from more coverage.
Essentially, we're getting to the point where we're discussing quality versus quantity of light. The light I gave as an example covers a very high range of the spectrum, with adjustments for specific ranges for specific growth needs. A fistful of relatively low PAR lights on the correct spectra, and set up to prevent shadowing, can be more effective than a higher PAR light. Throw in a UV light too, and you MIGHT potentially make a huge difference. UV can make a difference for some species after all.

Now I don't know much about how all this translates into the numbers on the box, but I do know to look for wide spectra heavy in the red, light on the green, and a little heavier on the blue.

The big question is how we put all this into effect for this situation. What are the spectral needs of elms?
So, has anyone attempted supplementing with UV for growing elms indoors? That's my first, most obvious, question.

 

[Glaucus]

I strongly disagree. It is just very smart to understand the basic physiology and biochemistry of plants. Some things we humans understand poorly. But other things, like photosynthesis and generic plant metabolism have been very well studied decades ago.

As for PAR, I do not understand your comment about light penetration and spectral intensity. PAR is a property of the grow light. How much photons that the plant can turn into ATP molecules does the light produce per second? This is PPF. But for the plant, what is relevant is the PPFD, which is the amount of photons per square meter per second. So you have a certain wattage, which depending on the spectrum of the light equals a certain amount of PPF. And that PPF you can spread out over a certain region by raising or lowering the light. What the plant experiences is then the PPFD; micromoles per meter squared per second.
One simply does not really consider how much photons can penetrate the canopy, because that is mostly a properly of the morphology of the plant. If the plant has an odd shape or not that many leaves, a lot of photons could be wasted. One also ignores if the plant has a lot of leaves in the canopy vs a lot of leaves lower down. One just provides a certain amount of light. If the plant fails to capture the light because it does not have enough leaves, or because it shades out its own leaves, then this is a properly of the plant. The exact same thing happens outdoors. You provide a photon flux density equivilant to outdoors, and then you know you are doing well. Or a fraction of this if you know the plant doesn't need that much light or if it receives natural light through a window.

The wavelength of the light does not really matter. Photosystem I and II can use photons in the 400 to 700 nm range. It is true that more energy is required to create a 400 nm photon. The plant isn't able to use all the energy of a photon, so high energy photons are less efficient. Every photon in a sense is equal. Green photons are just as good as red or blue photons. So if you use a lower percentage of the energy of the entire photon, the plant dissipates more energy through heat. And if a photon of a certain wavelength requires more energy to be created, that is also inefficient.
UV photons have too much energy and can damage or stress a plant. In contrast, IR photons have too little energy. That said, there are some complicated processes that are influenced by UV and IR radiation. But in general, they are ignored when calculating PAR. And this is generally the same for all plants. It is true that skewed spectra can change the type of growth of a plant. But nowadays all grow lights are white and therefore should result in normal growth.

I don't get the '26 PAR at 6 inch' vs '100 PAR at 1 inch' comment. If you have 100 PAR and send it out towards the plant in a conical region, and then you put this cone of light 1 inch away from the light, that is going to give vastly more PPFD than a 26 PAR light 6 inches away. In fact, it would often fall away with 1 over the square of the distance. So 6 times as far away means 36 times less photons. Which means 36 times less energy production. Of course, some plants do not need that much light and can be damaged or stressed by too much of it. But you think '26 PAR at 6 inch' gives better cover. Considering that a bright summer day can peak at 1700 micromoles per meter squared per second, 26 is not a lot. But I think that 26 value means you can create 26 micromoles per second over a square meter. If you focus those same photons in an area way smaller, say 20 by 20 cm, you can get 650 micromoles per meter squared per second. And that is pretty good for plants that require bright sunlight and like to grow unshaded. Put it on for 14 hours, and a tree species will have enough light. But you have to put the light so that you spread it out pretty evenly over that 20 by 20 cm area only.

I don't get why your most obvious question is about UV. Basically no plant needs to be supplemented by UV. Possibly, UV can help some plants stress out and produce more tasty fruits, higher yield on cannabis oil, or hotter chili peppers. Additionally, it can causee plants to grow much more compact, completely avoiding stem elongation that occurs when a plant thinks it is shaded and wants to grow towards the sunlight.

 

[Bonsaiscaper]

I joined this forum recently because of my new interest in bonsai,…and encountered this thread. I’m no way an expert of either bonsai or elm, but I can give you advice on paludarium setup. Rules can be broken through experimenting. The art of bonsai is a result of experimentation. (Try to go to a saltwater forum and say you run your tank Synthetic Dutch method aka no water change. You will face a lot of challengers.)

For a paludarium setup, lighting-water-airflow-placement are important things to consider. I saw that some of your leaves turned yellow. It could be a light shock situation where you didn’t acclimate the trees properly with ramping up the light slowly. High-end LED can burn your plant depends on which brands you are using. I’m not sure what your current plan is for the tank and if it has changed from the original post. Maybe you can give us an update on its current status?

if elm requires a dormancy period, maybe you can build this tank around its requirement: lighting simulation, temp drop, etc. it can go pretty high tech and time consuming!! Or can you plant your elms in a way that you can remove them from the main tank for dormancy without compromise the aesthetics?

Paludarium pic attached for credential (don’t come for me) A lot of plants’ placements took a lot of consideration and planning because they are all from different climate around the world but they all work and thrive for years. I hope you can find a way to make your situation work and everything happy!

I am currently “experimenting” growing trees indoor too but I won’t post until I’m confident with the finished result. Cheers!

 

[ShadyStump]

I joined this forum recently because of my new interest in bonsai,…and encountered this thread. I’m no way an expert of either bonsai or elm, but I can give you advice on paludarium setup. Rules can be broken through experimenting. The art of bonsai is a result of experimentation. (Try to go to a saltwater forum and say you run your tank Synthetic Dutch method aka no water change. You will face a lot of challengers.)

For a paludarium setup, lighting-water-airflow-placement are important things to consider. I saw that some of your leaves turned yellow. It could be a light shock situation where you didn’t acclimate the trees properly with ramping up the light slowly. High-end LED can burn your plant depends on which brands you are using. I’m not sure what your current plan is for the tank and if it has changed from the original post. Maybe you can give us an update on its current status?

if elm requires a dormancy period, maybe you can build this tank around its requirement: lighting simulation, temp drop, etc. it can go pretty high tech and time consuming!! Or can you plant your elms in a way that you can remove them from the main tank for dormancy without compromise the aesthetics?

Paludarium pic attached for credential (don’t come for me) A lot of plants’ placements took a lot of consideration and planning because they are all from different climate around the world but they all work and thrive for years. I hope you can find a way to make your situation work and everything happy!

I am currently “experimenting” growing trees indoor too but I won’t post until I’m confident with the finished result. Cheers!

I like your statement on placement.

Maybe this is where I've failed to be clear on my arguments.
Grow lights don't have to be directly overhead. Many weaker lights aimed from angles that illuminate the most foliage are as effective as stronger lights from one overhead angle. This is what I meant by penetration. Foliage that's shaded saps more resources than it produces. Any decent light, regardless of what direction it's from, is effective lighting as far as the health of the tree is concerned.

 

[Glaucus]

If you put light at an angle then yes they will hit otherwise shaded leaves. But overall, you will be wasting energy because a lot of light will go through the plant and fall next to it.

It can make sense to put lights at an angle alongside the one overhead, to improve penetration. And that can be more efficient than simply increasing the wattage of the overhead light.
But if you have only one light, it only makes sense to put the plants exactly in the hot spot of that light.

 

[ShadyStump]

Exactly.
Maybe I've not been communicating it in the clearest way, but this was what I was talking about. Additional lights on the cheap to help keep the trees going.
My concern was how to do this within @Aquaticjade's resources, assuming we haven't scared her off with our constant debate.

Overarching issue: resources available.
1st step: keep the trees alive.
2nd step: make it look decent.

From my reading, Jacqueline Hilliers have successfully been kept evergreen for several years at a time, so we're not too worried about dormancy right now. This will allow OP time to build resources to replace the trees even if they fail, or to strategize and learn new techniques that will otherwise over come this hurdle.
We get the trees lit effectively, she's well on her way.

 

[ShadyStump]

I also keep running into the issue of fertilizing, but it hasn't come up yet.
It won't really be an option, or it will affect the water quality for the newts.
Compost should be safe and effective though. Maybe something like organic fert pellets similar to osmocote would be an option if used sparingly.

OP had mentioned planting the trees in akadama, which wouldn't be awful normally, but if fertilizer regimens are off the table, this won't be the best idea.
In the flip side, though, this makes it cheaper, freeing up resources for other parts of the project.